Buy your way out of violation?

[hugheske44]

Recently it was brought up on herethat calling time out doesnt get the opposite team out of a lane violation on a free throw....which got my partner thinking and asking me the question...

A is at the free throw line, ref gives ball to A, they have full control, dribble a couple times, then lose the ball. the 10 second time is not up and they have not left the semi-circle. Team As coach calls time out....does this buy them out of the violation?

I said no, but couldnt find it in the casebook. I looked under free throws and time outs. He said its in there, any help is appreciated~~~

[mbyron]

Losing the ball is not a violation.

[Indianaref]

Player control is required in requesting a time-out.

[Adam]

Your partner is right. I'll look for the cite.

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by hugheske44

Recently it was brought up on herethat calling time out doesnt get the opposite team out of a lane violation on a free throw....which got my partner thinking and asking me the question...

A is at the free throw line, ref gives ball to A, they have full control, dribble a couple times, then lose the ball. the 10 second time is not up and they have not left the semi-circle. Team As coach calls time out....does this buy them out of the violation?

I said no, but couldnt find it in the casebook. I looked under free throws and time outs. He said its in there, any help is appreciated~~~

Would be the same as a backcourt scenario. You didn't pick up counts halfway. If coach thought shooter was approaching 10 seconds even though he was preparing to shoot would be the same as you describe.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Indianaref

Player control is required in requesting a time-out.

Or "at the disposal" of a free thrower or shooter. By rule, a player could request a TO here, but by case play, I believe this is a violation as soon it escapes his reach.

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by Indianaref

Player control is required in requesting a time-out.

He has total player control ........he's in the semi circle, can sit on it, do a hand stand, dribble it with two hands, it's his little world for 10 seconds as long as he stays 'home'

[Indianaref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Or "at the disposal" of a free thrower or shooter. By rule, a player could request a TO here, but by case play, I believe this is a violation as soon it escapes his reach.

If it's a fumble when the ball is bounced to the free thrower, no violation, just reset. However, in the OP situation it is a violation once it escapes his/her reach.

[Indianaref]

Originally Posted by fullor30

He has total player control ........he's in the semi circle, can sit on it, do a hand stand, dribble it with two hands, it's his little world for 10 seconds as long as he stays 'home'

I was assuming the ball left the semi-circle.

[Adam]

Okay, case play 9.1.1 indicates the official should blow it dead and readminister even if the player "accidentally drops the ball." I'm still looking.

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by Indianaref

I was assuming the ball left the semi-circle.

Read the OP

And we are getting away from the original question can coach buy out of a violation.

[hugheske44]

Yes in my original question, the ball is lost outside of the semi-circle, I realize they can do whatever they want with the ball in the circle.

The player has limited options on what to do once they lose the ball, go chase the ball--violation, let the 10 seconds expire--violation, call time out---violation???

My partner just said he may have seen it in Referee magazine, not the case book. I told him I cant find it specifically in the case book. Or possibly it couldve been in an older casebook since they do change them every so often?~~~

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Okay, case play 9.1.1 indicates the official should blow it dead and readminister even if the player "accidentally drops the ball." I'm still looking.

That's a. Look at b.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

That's a. Look at b.

That's it, thanks. I was looking at last year's case book, which is slightly different. Last year's said he just dropped it after having it, and both situations called for a re-set.

This year's says to call the violation if he dribbles it off his foot into the lane.

At first glance, I don't like this case play. However, all the defense would have to do to ensure the violation is grab the ball and toss it OOB; even if they had to step in the lane to intercept a pass from an offensive player in his lane space, a double violation on a free throw penalizes the offense rather than the defense.

[BillyMac]

*9.1.1 SITUATION: A1, at the free-throw line to attempt a free throw: (a) muffs the pass from the official and it rolls forward; or (b) while performing his/her habitual dribbles prior to the release, accidentally allows the ball to deflect off his/her foot into the lane. RULING: In (a), the official should sound the whistle to prevent any violations and then start the free throw procedure again. No freethrow violation should be called in this situation. In (b), a free-throw violation shall be called on A1. (9-1-3a, e)